Be Thankful You’re Not in a “Vegetative State”

• Tuesday, November 24, 2009, 6:47
• Battleground Iowa, News Center
• 622 views
• 21 comments

• Share
  Delicious Digg Design Float Mixx Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati
• Printable version

About the Author

Battleground Iowa has written 182 stories on this site.

Emily Geiger writes from a conservative perspective on everything from politics to religion to pop culture. Like the original Emily of Revolutionary War era, this Emily is delivering important messages crucial to winning the raging war of the time, but today, this is a culture war rather than a traditional one. And, like the original Emily, sometimes it takes a woman to do (or say) that which lesser men lack the courage and tenacity to do.

21 Comments on “Be Thankful You’re Not in a “Vegetative State””

• 
  SharpHawkeye wrote on 24 November, 2009, 9:22

  I just don’t know. I think this guy might have been better off if someone had pulled the plug on him. I know I wouldn’t want to live that way.
• 
  belikebunce wrote on 24 November, 2009, 9:32

  Sharp – What you just described is euthanasia.  ”According to the House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics, the precise definition of euthanasia is ‘a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering’.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia#cite_note-Harris-2001-0)

  I don’t like the possible ramifications of justifiable mercy killings.  That water gets very deep very fast.  In most states, even most civilized nations euthanasia meets the legal definition of murder.  That is not something I can legally support.  It might not be something I would legally prosecute, but I definitely would not create a legal exception for it.
• 
  Jeff wrote on 24 November, 2009, 9:32

  > like being thankful for the fact that it wasn’t a cheating spouse who wanted a new life with a shack-up honey making his healthcare decisions for him.

  Interesting you bring up the Terry Schiavo case, since when the performed her autopsy they concluded that:

  “The brain weighed 615 grams, roughly half of the expected weight of a human brain. … This damage was irreversible, and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons.”

  Take from a Fox News article here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,159606,00.html
• 
  robpo wrote on 24 November, 2009, 9:35

  What an embarrassing piece of trash disguised as writing. Please allow me to offer a summary that tops the original. The story of this Belgian guy is very interesting, it tells us we have a lot to learn and develop regarding brain injuries and vegetative-state. We haven’t done a very good job diagnosing these injuries so far.

  Now, that doesn’t get idiots riled up like Emily’s garbage, but maybe thats a good thing. Maybe its time we not worry so much about the raging culture war and just try to look at topics and have a spirited debate like rational people.

  For one, its wrong to equate every case of vegetative-state as being the same. Brain scans of the Belgian guy showed normal brain activity, was the same true of Terri Shiavo? Two, plug-pulling decisions go to the spouse, its the law. If you want to change the law, say so and argue for it. Until you change the law to give you some say, you or pro-life groups have no business interfering in private family decisions, unless its YOUR family. But first please explain why pro-life socialism is any better than Obama socialism.

  Its unfortunate people equate views like Emily offers with Republicans. Its a top tier reason Republicans have such low approval and minorities in Congress and no power in the Executive. Everyone who reads this article should hold it up as what we need to get away from if we’re to be taken seriously in any discussion. This article appeals only to the lowest common denominator, which is what conservatism has become because of expressions like this. Emily was right about one thing, she doesn’t offer a fair assessment.
• 
  Peggy wrote on 24 November, 2009, 9:35

  Jeff,

  IF that’s even accurate, Terri Schiavo didn’t die because her brain weighed 615 grams. She was starved to death by her adulterous, narcissistic, vow-breaking husband.
• 
  Jeff wrote on 24 November, 2009, 9:49

  > IF that’s even accurate, Terri Schiavo didn’t die because her brain weighed 615 grams. She was starved to death by her adulterous, narcissistic, vow-breaking husband.

  That story is accurate. In fact, you can ready the scanned autopsy report in its entirety here:
  http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0615051terri1.html

  Again, from the Fox News article:
  “The autopsy also confirmed that Schiavo’s mind was compromised at the time of death. “There’s nothing in her autopsy report that is inconsistent with a persistent vegetative state,” said Dr. Stephen J. Nelson, a medical examiner who assisted in the autopsy.”

  Of course the weight of her brain didn’t kill her. It was a symptom (or rather result) of irreversible brain damage.

  I know you want to blame the husband (as many did) because he was having an affair, but there is a simple (and legally binding) solution if you are worried about this situation happening to you or someone you care about…get a Living Will.

  In fact, you can get a living will for $40 at LegalZoom dot com

  “A living will lets you specify decisions about artificial life support in advance. It not only ensures your wishes will be heard, but also protects your loved ones from having to make these difficult, deeply personal choices for you.”
• 
  Jeff wrote on 24 November, 2009, 9:53

  Also, her husband didn’t starve her to death. She was in a hospital since February 1990. If anyone starved her, it was the hospital…and they didn’t starve her.

  If you mean she was “starved” before then, that also couldn’t be proven when they admitted her in February 1990. Some claimed she had an eating disorder that could’ve caused a chemical imbalance which led to her collapse. Again, from the Fox News article:

  “The autopsy revealed there was no conclusive evidence that Schiavo had an eating disorder. [...]“No one observed Mrs. Schiavo taking diet pills, binging or purging, or consuming laxatives,” Thogmartin told reporters.[...]

  Thogmartin said a review of hospital records of her collapse showed she had a diminished potassium level in her blood. But he said that did not prove she had an eating disorder, because the emergency treatment she received at the time could have affected the potassium level.”
• 
  Jeff wrote on 24 November, 2009, 9:57

  Here’s the link to LegalZoom’s Living Will page. Honestly, if you are concerned about your care if you are ever in an immobilized and potentially vegetative state, $40 will buy you piece of mind and will legally protect your loved ones:

  http://www.legalzoom.com/living-wills/living-wills-overview.html
• 
  LoboSolo wrote on 24 November, 2009, 9:57

  i don’t care what the “churchies” say, please pull the plug on me when I’m in a vegetative state.
  I think Terry’s husband did the merciful thing. I think most reasonably intelligent people given the same situation would want the plugged pulled instead of living like this..
• 
  belikebunce wrote on 24 November, 2009, 10:00

  Again, the action that Mr. Schiavo took qualifies as murder, and possibly the subcategory of “assisting self murder”.  

  1782.04  Murder.–(1)(a)  The unlawful killing of a human being:
  1.  When perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed or any human being;

  782.08  Assisting self-murder.–Every person deliberately assisting another in the commission of self-murder shall be guilty of manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

  Since I am not a Floridian, nor someone who has influence on Mr Schiavo, therefor my opinions and beliefs have no bearing on this specific case.  However, I think this issue should have been fought years before it was.  This was a documented case of domestic abuse and should have been prosecuted as such.  Proper law enforcement would have prevented this debate from ever being necessary. 
• 
  Jeff wrote on 24 November, 2009, 10:14

  > However, I think this issue should have been fought years before it was. This was a documented case of domestic abuse and should have been prosecuted as such.

  I couldn’t find any evidence of this documented abuse online. Since you are the one that asserted it, could you provide some evidence for that claim?
• 
  Peggy wrote on 24 November, 2009, 10:29

  Earth to Jeff!

  Terri Schiavo was obviously incapacitated and needed others to help provide for her most basic needs. A newborn baby is in the same predicament.

  The cause of Terri’s death was dehydration/starvation. Did you not follow this case at all?

  Your autopsy reports are irrelevant – you’re only telling us what the whole world already knew: she had irreversible brain damage and required constant care. That’s no reason to starve someone to death!
• 
  belikebunce wrote on 24 November, 2009, 10:32

  Numerous professionals testified that Terri’s state at the arrival of medical professionals February 25, 1990 was consistent with classic symptoms of strangulation.  There was a history of domestic abuse, with numerous 911 calls and separations, all of which were presented as evidence during the custody battles.  However, since no evidence of strangulation was found at the scene, the issue was not pursued.

  There were also allegations of psychological and emotional abuse resulting in Terri’s documented eating disorders.  These eating disorders were ultimately determined to be the “cause” of Terri’s collapse.  There was ample time, and evidence for everyone involved, Terri, Terri’s family, fiends and neighbors, local law enforcement, Florida DHS, the County Prosecutor, the Florida Governor, etc, etc. to have prevented this tragedy from happening.  But everyone differed to the judgement of Terri and her husband.  Was that the right decision, I doubt we will ever know, but we should learn a lesson.

  I will sum up by editing my concluding sentence from my last post.  ”Proper [community involvement] [c]ould have prevented this debate from ever being necessary. “
• 
  robpo wrote on 24 November, 2009, 10:41

  bunce – while you’re finding documentation for the “documented case of domestic abuse”, you should read the murder statute again. Actually just read the first line you pasted, thats all that is needed to render the rest of it moot. I also wonder, are you opposed to the death penalty? The same first line of the statute makes the death penalty legal, but doesn’t change the fact you would be a hypocrit on principle to oppose one and not the other.

  Lobosolo – Forget it! Pro-life, that means you too. We’ll keep you alive and suffering because thats what we believe in!
• 
  Scott M wrote on 24 November, 2009, 10:44

  Doesn’t sound to me like this guy from Belgium wants to be dead, but thanks for your two cents saying his life isn’t worth anything.

  You people need to read the links provided here.

  “Michelle (Malkin, in writing about the Schiavo case) went on to note the establishment media’s dogged insistence that the autopsy results supported the idea that Terri was in a “persistent vegetative state” (PVS).

  But before Terri’s death, at least two prominent neurologists insisted that Terri was not in that condition. Additionally, the final sentence of Chief Medical Examiner Stephen J. Nelson’s report to the 10th Judicial Circuit of Florida (at Page 20 of the 39-page PDF) cautioned that:

  Neuropathological examination of the decedent’s brain — or any brain, for that matter — cannot prove or disprove a diagnosis of persistent vegetative state or minimally conscious state.”

  http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2009/08/30/ap-story-death-terri-schiavos-father-misrepresents-autopsy-results-ignor
• 
  belikebunce wrote on 24 November, 2009, 10:47

  Robpo – Mr. Schiavo removed fluid and nutrition from his wife.  That was a “premeditated design to effect the death of the person”

  Additionally – The murder laws govern individuals, not The People by way of The State.  The Death Penalty is not carried out by an individual.  It is 1)an act of justice 2)met out by The People on 3)a criminal 4)found guilty beyond reasonable doubt in 5)a court of law.

  Very different.
• 
  robpo wrote on 24 November, 2009, 11:06

  bunce – it was a premeditated design of lawful killing. Lawful. Thats the part you need to re-read. It was lawful. Assuming you didn’t actually gloss over that fact, led to my question about the death penalty. My assumption meant you oppose what happened with Schiavo based on principle regarding murder, not the actual law. As such, its consistent to oppose the death penalty on the same principle. Murder laws most certainly do govern The State as well as individuals. Mercy killing and the death penalty are very different according to the law, but you are standing on principle with this point. If thats not correct, just say so. If you want to change the law, just state it. But facts is facts, the law was properly applied in the Schiavo case.

  And Peggy, just finish your thought, you’re so close. The whole world knew Schiavo had irreversible brain damage and required constant care. She was brain dead, fed by tubes and machines. According to her legal guardian her wishes were not to live in such a state. THAT is reason to starve her to death. See? There was a reason.
• 
  Scott M wrote on 24 November, 2009, 11:08

  So, the medical examiner says he could not confirm (and it would be impossible to confirm) a vegetative state. I find the brain weight argument utterly unpersuasive. A newborn’s brain weights 360 grams. A one-year-old’s brain weighs 940 grams. Is it okay to starve children at this age because their brain does not allow them to function as a normal adult?
• 
  belikebunce wrote on 24 November, 2009, 11:18

  robpo – you make the allegation that this was “lawful killing.”  I am not going to argue that with you,  I don’t know, but I could not find any place that made exception, allowing this to be “lawful”.  Please explain your reasoning.

  You then contradict youself by stating that you made an assumption that I “oppose what happened… on principle… not the actual law.”  That is both correct, and incorrect.  What we are discussing here is the morality of euthanasia laws.  I don’t know of any state in the Union where euthanasia is legal, and it is definitely not moral.

  Meting out justice on a convicted criminal however, is not only moral, it is the only moral action that can be taken by the state.
• 
  Peggy wrote on 24 November, 2009, 13:57

  “She was brain dead, fed by tubes and machines. According to her legal guardian her wishes were not to live in such a state. THAT is reason to starve her to death.” — robpo

  Schiavo was not “fed by tubes and machines”! She had a feeding tube. Do you know how common they are, rob? I have a friend whose otherwise normal 4 year old daughter had to be fed via feeding tube until she had surgery to correct a gastro-intestinal disorder.

  Her legal guardian??? You mean the so-called husband who was living with another woman and had a child or two with her? The courts – and you – are going to take his word for it? Give me a break.

  What’s more humane, withholding fluids and nourishment from someone until they die or a lethal injection? Why was Terri Schiavo’s death more cruel and unusual than someone condemned to death row?
• 
  Jeff wrote on 25 November, 2009, 8:18

  > Your autopsy reports are irrelevant – you’re only telling us what the whole world already knew: she had irreversible brain damage and required constant care. That’s no reason to starve someone to death!

  Ah, ok. Now I understand our disagreement with my comment. Your point is that, if someone does not have the mental capacity to make a choice for their own life, then we must assume they want to live, because the alternative choice is irreversible.

  I can accept and understand that, and I agree with you. For me, I’d rather not live if I am in a suspected vegetative state, but I definitely want a 2nd opinion. This is why living wills are so important, and why I have one. I was nearly killed in a car accident a couple of years ago, which is why I got one….I really think it’s something everyone should have.

  Now, go get a living will and avoid this situation and take the burden off of your loved ones! If you have life insurance, then you obviously care about not burdening those that depend on you…make a living will a part of this process as well. Makes a great Christmas gift

  http://www.legalzoom.com/living-wills/living-wills-overview.html

Write a Comment

Gravatars are small images that can show your personality. You can get your gravatar for free today!

You must be logged in to post a comment.